The Ministry of Home Affairs banned a public forum scheduled for yesterday which would have featured a talk on the topic, 'Sexual orientation in international law, a case for Asia', saying that it was contrary to public interest.

The forum was to have been open to one and all who are interested to hear views and opinions related to society. How could it be against public interest?

I am a straight member of the public who wants to understand issues that sexual minorities confront, especially in an Asian country like Singapore.

Another reason cited for the ban was that 'foreigners should refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Singapore', a reference to the invitation to a foreign-based speaker to participate in the forum.

I believe that views and feedback from foreigners can improve our society and make Singapore stronger. This is important for Singapore as a cosmopolitan country, open to talents from all over the world.

It is a pity that the forum was banned, depriving people like me of the education and awareness it could have given with respect to minorities in our society.

Should we subject ourselves to censorship due to the vague notion of public interest?

What then is public interest?

Instead of a ban, restrictions such as an age limit could have been imposed. A small compromise from the authorities would go a long way for education and awareness.

Ho Chi Sam

* * * * *

3 August 2007
Sent to the Straits Times, but not chosen for publication

Dear Sir, 

Shame, shame and more shame on the authorities of Singapore for banning an academic talk this week at the gay rights forum.

Are Singapore morals so fragile that a single talk given in a contained venue by a respected authority about legal issues and human sexuality in Asia can threaten the morality of the Singapore?

The decision to ban Professor Sanders from speaking at the gay rights forum is insulting, immature and lacks any good judgment. Do they think for a minute that forbidding a discussion of homosexuality, however oblique, will make gay issues go away? This is adolescent naivete at best, bigoted and discriminatory at worst.

When will Singapore's leaders wake up to 21st century progressive thinking? Like it or not virtually everyone (other than the authorities) in Singapore already is familiar with same-sex issues currently on topic from Malaysia to Iceland.

Refusing to allow even an generic academic talk on sexuality, which this was, raises the question of the morality of the decision itself. Rejecting the full truth about human nature, behavior and psychology is immoral; pretending to claim truth in the name of ignorance is immoral; denying citzens' voice is immoral.

Rather than banning the professor I sugggest banning the police censors. It would bring more honor and integrity than is currently evident.